tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2502365306449921986.post1678145410598900253..comments2023-11-03T01:57:19.116-07:00Comments on Paranormal and Life After Death: Rebutting Steven NovellaLeo MacDonaldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14261335532022864528noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2502365306449921986.post-67860585759183564302008-04-26T12:40:00.000-07:002008-04-26T12:40:00.000-07:00It can be found here http://www.cogsci.uci.edu/~dd...It can be found here <BR/><BR/>http://www.cogsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/ConsciousRealism2.pdfLeo MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14261335532022864528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2502365306449921986.post-91047012249268572612008-04-26T12:38:00.000-07:002008-04-26T12:38:00.000-07:00Hi, Steve thanks for the commentI have read some o...Hi, Steve thanks for the comment<BR/><BR/>I have read some of those studies on free will. To me they can be interpretated in more than one way. <BR/><BR/>You may be interested in this <BR/><BR/>Revolutionary findings of Nobel Laureate Roger Sperry in the area of brain science. Sperry demonstrated beyond doubt that the conscious intention to do something comes first--before the firing of the brain cells and the whole neural network connected with this human intention. Sperry specified the supplementary motor area (SMA) as the brain area that is activated first by human consciousness. These findings contradicted Sperry’s own theoretical inclinations. Originally, and for decades, Sperry had wanted to prove that brain processes create consciousness. His fact-based scientific discoveries showed otherwise. Consciousness can precede and alter brain events.<BR/><BR/>Now about the transmission theory and how it maybe tested Professor William James goes into great detail about the transmission theory here <BR/><BR/>http://www.newdualism.org/papers/W.James/James_Immortality.html<BR/><BR/><BR/>You maybe interested to hearing what cognitive scientist Donald. D Hoffman says about materialism <BR/><BR/>Despite substantial efforts by many researchers, we still have no scientific theory of how brain activity could create or be conscious experience. This is troubling, since we have a<BR/>large body of correlations between brain activity and consciousness, correlations normally assumed to entail that brain activity creates conscios experience. <BR/><BR/>In short, the scientific study of consciousness is in the embarrassing position of<BR/>having no scientific theory of consciousness.<BR/>This remarkable situation provokes several responses. The first concludes that,<BR/>although consciousness arises naturalistically from brain activity, humans lack the<BR/>cognitive capacities required to formulate a scientific theory. As McGinn (1989) puts it,<BR/>“We know that brains are the de facto causal basis of consciousness, but we have, it<BR/>seems, no understanding whatever of how this can be so.” Pinker (1997) agrees. After<BR/>asking how conscious experience arises from physical systems he answers, “Beats the<BR/>heck out of me. I have some prejudices, but no idea of how to begin to look for a<BR/>defensible answer. And neither does anyone else. The computational theory of mind<BR/>offers no insight; neither does any finding in neuroscience, once you clear up the usual<BR/>confusion of sentience with access and self-knowledge.”Leo MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14261335532022864528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2502365306449921986.post-59480482139855858072008-04-15T13:41:00.000-07:002008-04-15T13:41:00.000-07:00"Leo- Here he says it cannot be dismisses as mere ..."Leo- Here he says it cannot be dismisses as mere correlation but he says brain function correlates with the mind but there is another testable hypothesis that the brain filters consciousness or is the transmitter/receiver of consciousness."<BR/><BR/>Leo - thanks for responding to my blog post. You need to ask - how is the transmitter-receiver hypothesis testable. I don't believe you stated this in your rebuttal. If it cannot be distinguished from the brain causing mind - what good is it?<BR/><BR/>But, I think it is testable. If brain function could be shown to precede the manifestation of mind then that would support the brain causing mind and refute the transmitter hypothesis.<BR/><BR/>The evidence clearly shows this. Here is just one example from my b log this week: http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php?p=273Steve Novellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15988524202904315630noreply@blogger.com